Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Daedrova" data-source="post: 1884661" data-attributes="member: 11835">This seems incorrect to me.&nbsp; You completely occupy your 5 ft square.&nbsp; The adjacent squares (next to you) are not 5 ft away, you are touching them.&nbsp; Those squares are 5 ft, so when the spell says &quot;beyond 5 feet&quot; it is stating that adjacent squares provide no concealment to you (being the observer), and the squares outside those provide concealment.See the model below as each letter representing a 5 ft square.o= observer/youc= concealment squarea= adjacent (no concealment)c c c c cc a a a cc a o a cc a a a cc c c c cSquares outside of this would have total concealment of course. If adjacent squares were intended to be concealed with OM (despite the ambiguity of the spell wording) then, as addressed earlier, there would be no way to sneak attack (providing the two are medium size creatures).I can see how it could be interpreted two different ways (mine being shown above).&nbsp; Outside the system I ask “is the intention of the spell to not allow characters to see beyond their nose” (as the other interpretation would imply) “or are two characters who are dueling still supposed to be able to see each other well enough to fight normally?”Just how obscuring is this mist? The focal question I would raise here is concerning the observer being flat-footed, regardless of which squares grant concealment.&nbsp; If you are unaware of the attack, you cannot defend against it, and thus would be denied your Dex bonus (granting an attacker sneak attack damage).&nbsp; So the question is, would the Observer in this situation become aware of the attacker when it is not the Observer's turn?&nbsp; If so, why?&nbsp; Would this be automatic because the attacker left concealment?&nbsp; Should there be a Spot check to notice the attacker in the brief moment between him leaving concealment and making the attack?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Daedrova, post: 1884661, member: 11835"] This seems incorrect to me. You completely occupy your 5 ft square. The adjacent squares (next to you) are not 5 ft away, you are touching them. Those squares are 5 ft, so when the spell says "beyond 5 feet" it is stating that adjacent squares provide no concealment to you (being the observer), and the squares outside those provide concealment. See the model below as each letter representing a 5 ft square. o= observer/you c= concealment square a= adjacent (no concealment) c c c c c c a a a c c a o a c c a a a c c c c c c Squares outside of this would have total concealment of course. If adjacent squares were intended to be concealed with OM (despite the ambiguity of the spell wording) then, as addressed earlier, there would be no way to sneak attack (providing the two are medium size creatures). I can see how it could be interpreted two different ways (mine being shown above). Outside the system I ask “is the intention of the spell to not allow characters to see beyond their nose” (as the other interpretation would imply) “or are two characters who are dueling still supposed to be able to see each other well enough to fight normally?” Just how obscuring is this mist? The focal question I would raise here is concerning the observer being flat-footed, regardless of which squares grant concealment. If you are unaware of the attack, you cannot defend against it, and thus would be denied your Dex bonus (granting an attacker sneak attack damage). So the question is, would the Observer in this situation become aware of the attacker when it is not the Observer's turn? If so, why? Would this be automatic because the attacker left concealment? Should there be a Spot check to notice the attacker in the brief moment between him leaving concealment and making the attack? [/QUOTE]

Verification